First pics with the D40X & 55-200mm VR

[AndyE]

Hi,

got my D40X today, plus the 55-200mm VR lens.

You can find all pics in reduced and full 10mp resolution here - www.pbase.com/andrease/d40x
No Postprocessing whatsoever. All EXIF information is available. All pics handhold.

Used lenses:
The 55-200mm VR, for comparison the 70-200 VR, plus 2 pics with the 17-55/2.8.

I'll send you more comments later. Pics first :smile:

regards,
Andy



D40X, 55-200mm VR, 200mm

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

D40X, 55-200mm VR, 160mm
View attachment 88618

D40X, 70-200mm VR, 200mm
View attachment 88619

D40X, 70-200mm VR, 200mm
View attachment 88620

D40X, 17-55mm/2.8, 17mm
View attachment 88621

D40X, 17-55mm/2.8, 17mm
View attachment 88622

 

[Steved53]

Very impressive Andy.

That seems like a great package. I can see a difference between the 55-200 and the 70-200, but in capable hands I think the 55-200 and the d40x is an awesome combination, considering the price.

Have you done any testing at high iso? I wonder how the relatively high pixel count has affected that.

 

[AndyE]

Have you done any testing at high iso? I wonder how the relatively high pixel count has affected that.

Steve,
sorry, it is spring time, the sun is out and you are asking for an ISO 1600 pic ? :smile:

Okay, here is one with my dog ....

regards,
Andy


D40X, 105/2.8, ISO 1600 (full resolution)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Harry S.]

I can see a difference between the 55-200 and the 70-200, but in capable hands I think the 55-200 and the d40x is an awesome combination, considering the price.

I agree, there is an obvious difference in sharpness between the two lenses. Well, I would dump my 70-200 if there weren't :biggrin:
Cheers

 

[Harry S.]

Steve,
sorry, it is spring time, the sun is out and you are asking for an ISO 1600 pic ? :smile:

Okay, here is one with my dog ....

regards,
Andy


D40X, 105/2.8, ISO 1600 (full resolution)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Now that's really impressive. If it behaves similarly in more adverse lighting conditions I pull my hat.

Cheers

 

[Stephen Hopkins]

That ISO1600 shot really makes me wish I could move to the D40x from my D50... If I already had more AFS/HSM lenses I would but I only have 1 (Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM) and I can't afford to replace my screw-drive lenses (Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DF, 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX DG) with equivalent AFS/HSM models... though if Sigma had a fast HSM normal-zoom I'd give it some strong consideration. I don't think I could get away w/ just a 30mm f/1.4 HSM and I know the 24-85mm AFS would leave me missing the f/2.8 too much... no way I can afford a 17-55mm AFS or 28-70mm AFS.

 

[Dave]

I agree with you Stephen, I would switch in an instant to the D40x if it had an internal focus motor after seeing that high ISO shot. I have really been thinking about buying a D80 to accompany my D50 so that my wife and I can both shoot at the same time (as there are many times I wish we both had a camera). I think I am close to doing that too as a friend of mine with a D80 went to Japan and shot tons of pictures all at ISO 1600 and I looked at his 4x6 prints and could not even tell they were not ISO 200.

 

[Snipps]

Wow If I wanted a 2nd body that d40x is certainly what it would be!

 

[watsonD50]

i don't

see a sharpness difference to warrant picking the 70-200 over the 55-200 other than build, autofocus speed, and faster apeture. It just shows that Nikon's consumer optics are really strong contenders if you don't need pro features.

 

[Gale]

55-200 (VR???)

Am I missing something

 

[Stephen Hopkins]

The 55-200mm VR was anounced a week or two ago and is now starting to get into a few peoples hands. Looks to be a prett good little lens, just like the prior non-VR version!

 

[AndyE]

55-200 (VR???)

Am I missing something

It might very well be ..... :smile:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030601nikon55200vr.asp

 

[Mwilson50]

Actually I don't know if it is just the picture but am I seeing a bit of vignetting on the 55-200 at 160mm?

 

[HAC_X]

Oh deary me..
I was going to get a D80 w/18-70, but just had a look at Vistek's site.. I can get the d40X w 18-55 and 55-200VR for less.. Time to really think on this..
Cheers
Harold

 

[Pa]

The 55-200mm VR was announced a week or two ago and is now starting to get into a few peoples hands. Looks to be a pretty good little lens, just like the prior non-VR version!

It's VR II I suppose? How large is it Andy? Can you give us a picture with something to compare it to?

 

[Stephen Hopkins]

I beleive it's VR I... zoomed in with hood off its about the same size as an 18-55

 

[AndyE]

It's VR II I suppose? How large is it Andy? Can you give us a picture with something to compare it to?

Here it is ....

It is about the same size as the AFS 18-200mm VR (A bit taller, a bit slimmer)

regards,
Andy

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Pa]

Thanks, Andy. It looks a lot like the 70-300VR - just shorter.